So here is the first pic in hopefully a series of profiles of coworkers. We had a fire drill on Tuesday so I tried to snap a couple. I'm not good at snapping pictures with my phone without people noticing apparently so I have no future as a voyer. Whenever I can get more I will gladly share them with you. You should all keep in mind this is a gross invasion of privacy....in public. :lol:

This is Diane, she is 60 years old. She is the one you get more of the full view of and she reminds me a lot of chicken lady from Kids in the Hall.

picture of big nosed coworker lady was here

http://blog.holidays.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/11042007.jpg

I'm sure resemblence is obvious. Sitting near her really seals the deal as she is one of the most annyonig people in the office. She has argued that personal phone calls should not be counted towards a persons break or lunch hour and that the company should understand she has a daughter to talk to at random times throughout the day. Her daughters are all over 21 by the way.

The biggest issue and the most annyoing thing about Diane was her inability to keep her cell phone on silent or vibrate for my first 18 months here. Twice a day I would hear 'supercalifragilisticespalidocious'. Mostly when she wasn't at her desk while her phone was so it played forever and ever. I don't know how many versions there are of such an awful song but this was straight out of the musical. I could picture Mary Poppins dancing with that umbrella.

The lady on the right is bigger than me but she is nice. Her name is Shelley. She is a mormon and one of the snitches at work who you have to watch your words around. She definitely has a chip on her shoulder and thinks she is one of the only few who does her fair share of work. She is married and I assume she lives in Mesa because she is mormon but that's just a stereotype. She is in her late 20's and recently moved cubicle locations so she didn't have to deal with any of us in the big records room. Now she sits in a cublicle outside of our area with 2 others from records. Shelley has given me Soduku puzzles to work on when my internet ban was in effect.

That's all for now folks. I hope some of you can contribute photo's and profiles of some of the slugs you all work with.

RageAgainstTheAoki

11-05-2009, 08:20 AM

Oh my. Looking for a new job are we?

paganman7

11-05-2009, 08:22 AM

Damn homie, you have balls.

TomAz

11-05-2009, 08:23 AM

I concur. This thread is not wise.

edit: the photo part, I mean. Posting photos of people you know on an internet message board without their knowledge is asking for trouble.

I am kind of glad my camera on my phone sucks or I would be tempted to participate in this and take a picture of the male chauvinist prick I work with, then someone would see it, show it to him and he would fire me. Yay for shitty phones.

cormaic

11-05-2009, 08:31 AM

Wz7zo1BvvA4

TomAz

11-05-2009, 08:32 AM

Also, that Diane has a schnozz you could drive a truck through. Plastic surgery, woman.

MassiveChemicalPunk

11-05-2009, 08:34 AM

Man, this thread is going to hell quickly

wmgaretjax

11-05-2009, 08:35 AM

fucking imbecile...

TomAz

11-05-2009, 08:37 AM

I wonder what it is about the Church of Latter Day Saints that their members are all pale and sickly looking. Are they secretly vampires or something?

faxman75

11-05-2009, 08:38 AM

Here I thought I had a fun new thread for us to all play in. Seems harmless to me. Who doesn't sit around and talk shit about their coworkers on occasion? As far as the picture goes I was toying with the idea of only leaving that part up for a a day or so. If everyone agrees this is an inappropriate thread, we don't need to continue. :)

TomAz

11-05-2009, 08:38 AM

the thread is fine. edit out the picture.

faxman75

11-05-2009, 08:41 AM

Also, that Diane has a schnozz you could drive a truck through. Plastic surgery, woman.

Anti-semite!

PS:

I have removed the photo of the big nosed co worker.

faxman75

11-05-2009, 08:43 AM

the thread is fine. edit out the picture.

I suppose instead of pictures of the actual coworkers we can post a photo of the most famous person the coworker looks like while describing them.

Young blood

11-05-2009, 08:44 AM

http://img2.allposters.com/images/ATA/24808BP.jpg

canexplain

11-05-2009, 09:07 AM

I did a quick search to find out what is legal or not when it comes to posting a picture of someone without them saying ok. I didn't really find anything one way or the other in the quick search. It was funny though when I put in my search question the first link was "how to hack into a personal profile in facebook" lol ...... cr****

This doesn't answer the question but I did find this:

Even on public property, you can’t photograph somebody who has a “reasonable expectation of privacy.” Basically, that means you can’t snap shots of people in the bathroom, a dressing room, or similar places. Ask yourself: “Would the average person expect privacy?” If so, don’t take a photo

miscorrections

11-05-2009, 09:28 AM

What an unfortunate thread. It's one thing to splatter yourself all over the internet, it's totally different to do it to someone else without their knowledge.

paganman7

11-05-2009, 09:39 AM

It's funny that everyone's main issue with this thread is the photo, where my main issue with this thread is the description.

I try with all of my might to never say (and certainly never write) anything about someone that I would not want them to see, even if the chance of them seeing it are exceedingly rare.

Unless, of course, you don't actually care if they know how you truly feel about them. In that case, post away homie.

faxman75

11-05-2009, 09:45 AM

Controversy.

For the record this is hardly splattering their photo all over the internet and there are hundreds of pics on this board that have people in them who have not granted their permission.

Paganman, you have never ranted about a coworker before?

miscorrections

11-05-2009, 09:50 AM

I didn't say it was the photo. You're opening up the people you work with on a public board, which to me is a fairly terrible idea. It's one thing to mention your coworkers, maybe put up an anecdote about a conversation you had or something, but it's totally different to create a thread dedicated to profiling them.

paganman7

11-05-2009, 09:51 AM

Controversy.

For the record this is hardly splattering their photo all over the internet and there are hundreds of pics on this board that have people in them who have not granted their permission.

Paganman, you have never ranted about a coworker before?

To my wife at the dinner table.

I'm not judging you, I'm truly not.

edit: I would also like to add that I don't think anything you said was terribly out of line.

captncrzy

11-05-2009, 09:57 AM

Mark, you're wrong-everyone else is right.

Sorry, man. Not a smart thing to do.

Courtney

11-05-2009, 10:00 AM

I didn't say it was the photo. You're opening up the people you work with on a public board, which to me is a fairly terrible idea. It's one thing to mention your coworkers, maybe put up an anecdote about a conversation you had or something, but it's totally different to create a thread dedicated to profiling them.

Yes.

Faxman, I think this thread is pretty funny. But I also think it's a really really bad idea. If I was a non-internet person, and I found out that some random coworker had put an entire profile of me on some random website, I would be pretty sketched out.

faxman75

11-05-2009, 10:02 AM

Mark, you're wrong-everyone else is right.

Sorry, man. Not a smart thing to do.

:lool I certainly wasn't making the argument that it was smart thing to do.

canexplain

11-05-2009, 10:16 AM

I think I am going to disagree with the popular opinion (shock). As long as there is not libel involved, I don't think people can say much of anything. If a newspaper wrote an article about the street where you live, and they said "XX lives here, they paid XX for their house, they have 3 kids, etc" you really can't do much about it. All of the XX information is under the Freedom of Information Act which you might not like, but it's the law. Now is it good taste? I guess that depends on you. ??? cr****

edit: remember the guy that broke up with his GF years ago and posted the rant of hers online.....

Courtney

11-05-2009, 10:18 AM

Ron, as an aging hippie, you if anyone should understand that legality and morality are two completely separate issues.

humanoid

11-05-2009, 10:18 AM

I wonder what it is about the Church of Latter Day Saints that their members are all pale and sickly looking. Are they secretly vampires or something?

this has not been my experience

but yes, secretly vampires

faxman75

11-05-2009, 10:23 AM

Yes.

Faxman, I think this thread is pretty funny. But I also think it's a really really bad idea. If I was a non-internet person, and I found out that some random coworker had put an entire profile of me on some random website, I would be pretty sketched out.

Understood. The internet I grew up with had things like "mosh girl" and the dude from Walmart who blogged daily about his retarded co workers ( some of them actually retarded). The zillions of internet meme's created to humiliate folks and so on. I don't think this is even close to that type of stuff and honestly the chances of any of them finding their picture on the Coachella message board are incredibly slim. They can barely operate their outlook let alone navigate the internet and somehow find a photo of them that isn't tagged with them in any way. It was just meant as a fun way to rant about co workers and treat them like those magic the gathering cards or garbage pale kids.

Either way, the picture is down so the piling on others are doing is kind of silly at this point.

Young blood

11-05-2009, 10:33 AM

I find it funny and a great idea, but im a dick. I hope someone goes off on a co-worker and gets caught.

canexplain

11-05-2009, 10:33 AM

Courtney I am not sure I agree with you. The world is an open book now and it is just something we have to live with. This pic is 40 years old and a) I bet they didn't ask the guy on the right if it was ok to post the picture world wide and b) Talk about moral issues with the picture. cr****

Actually Courtney said I was delusional so maybe there is something to your post. So it goes. ….. cr****

Somewhat Damaged

11-05-2009, 11:16 AM

Mark, are you posting from work today?

TomAz

11-05-2009, 11:40 AM

Ron, as an aging hippie, you if anyone should understand that legality and morality are two completely separate issues.

The only thing Ron understands is that he has been to a lot of concerts and owns a dog suit.

TommyboyUNM

11-05-2009, 11:56 AM

I think I am going to disagree with the popular opinion (shock). As long as there is not libel involved, I don't think people can say much of anything. If a newspaper wrote an article about the street where you live, and they said "XX lives here, they paid XX for their house, they have 3 kids, etc" you really can't do much about it. All of the XX information is under the Freedom of Information Act which you might not like, but it's the law. Now is it good taste? I guess that depends on you. ??? cr****

edit: remember the guy that broke up with his GF years ago and posted the rant of hers online.....

What Fax said about his Mormon co-worker is probably not libel. I don't even think what he said about the other co-worker's work habits and complaining could be construed as libel. But posting a pic of her and comparing her to the chicken lady is sure straddling the line. She may have a case, though she would likely not receive any compensation because it didn't affect her financial situation.

And she's not considered a public figure, so I don't think satire could be argued in this case.

faxman75

11-05-2009, 12:11 PM

It's straddling the line to say someone looks like the chicken lady when posting their picture? :lool

If that's true that's pretty ridiculous.

SoulDischarge

11-05-2009, 12:24 PM

Do you have to ruin everything fun Tom?

TommyboyUNM

11-05-2009, 12:40 PM

It's straddling the line to say someone looks like the chicken lady when posting their picture? :lool

If that's true that's pretty ridiculous.

I wouldn't get offended by that, but many people are touchy. You're straddling the line, as far as libel is concerned, because you're expressing an opinion. Rather than stating things like she is 60-years old and lives in Phoenix (or whatever).

Young blood

11-05-2009, 12:43 PM

She looked like a chicken.

Monklish

11-05-2009, 12:55 PM

If she actually did resemble a chicken you might be able to get out of the lawsuit. Somebody page a law student and get some answers.

locachica73

11-05-2009, 12:57 PM

Where is Ally when we need her.

JustSteve

11-05-2009, 01:15 PM

being productive, unlike us.

Monklish

11-05-2009, 01:15 PM

Let's find a Jew law student so we can actually get the right answer.

locachica73

11-05-2009, 01:16 PM

good point. damn her and her motivation. :p

faxman75

11-05-2009, 01:36 PM

I wouldn't get offended by that, but many people are touchy. You're straddling the line, as far as libel is concerned, because you're expressing an opinion. Rather than stating things like she is 60-years old and lives in Phoenix (or whatever).

This is Diane, she is 60 years old. She is the one you get more of the full view of and she reminds me a lot of chicken lady from Kids in the Hall.

I'm sure resemblence is obvious. Sitting near her really seals the deal as she is one of the most annyonig people in the office. She has argued that personal phone calls should not be counted towards a persons break or lunch hour and that the company should understand she has a daughter to talk to at random times throughout the day. Her daughters are all over 21 by the way.

The biggest issue and the most annyoing thing about Diane was her inability to keep her cell phone on silent or vibrate for my first 18 months here. Twice a day I would hear 'supercalifragilisticespalidocious'. Mostly when she wasn't at her desk while her phone was so it played forever and ever. I don't know how many versions there are of such an awful song but this was straight out of the musical. I could picture Mary Poppins dancing with that umbrella.

So, after doing some thinking, I don't think this woman would win a libel case. He stated his opinions about her, but didn't try to frame those opinions into something that was a concrete lie. If he would've said "This is Diane and she stole $50,000 from work" then that would be libelous. He just said he thinks she looks like the chicken lady. He is allowed to express an outlandish opinion that a reasonable person will clearly know is an opinion. It would be up to the court to decide if a reasonable person would think this is just Fax's opinion, but I'm pretty sure that would be the decision. Most courts will look at things that are posted on a message board as clear opinion or hyperbole, unless the targeted person is falsely accused of something (see my "stole $50,000" example). Even a controversial opinion will likely not be grounds for a libel suit. What matters the most is if there's an insinuation of fact in the statement that a reasonable person could believe to be true.

The only reason why I thought this might be straddling the line between libel and not is that this woman is not a public figure. Therefore, she doesn't have to prove actual malice.

I'm just talking about what he wrote and not about posting the picture. I'm not sure what the expectation of privacy would be in that situation.

faxman75

11-05-2009, 01:45 PM

Next up was going to be my co-worker named May (her real name is a different month). She's about 86 and looks to be about 123. She constantly walks around with her lazer pointer telling people that their beverages need to be purified with her lazer pointer. She came to my desk one morning when I told her the water tasted funny. She pulled out her lazer pointer and did a virtual stir with the rays and with a grin said "now try". I did and it tasted the same. She shrugged and said it was woth a shot.

She kinda looks like this lady but I don't think she smokes.

http://friendsofburma.org/lwinmoe/imagesDec2006/old_lady.jpg

Just last week I had an altercation with May about a file. She came to my desk asking me why she has it in her hand if it was never tracked to her. She didn't know where it came from or why she had it. I told her to just track it to the shelf since it is closed and put it away. She kept pressing the issue and didn't understand why it would have came to her. I told her it really didn't matter and we should just be happy it's not lost and we have it. No reason to work backwards, my boss was talking to me at the time and she told her "May, just go file it". May glared at me for several days following that incident.

casey

11-05-2009, 01:52 PM

hahaha where do you work and why do you work with such weirdos? i mean i work with SOME weirdos but for the most part i just work with people who are really high maintenance fashionistas.

Young blood

11-05-2009, 01:55 PM

I miss Jesus. He was the best co-worker ever.

canexplain

11-05-2009, 01:59 PM

Well we won't be working with these people in any way :( (posted in the default thread) cr****

(CNN) -- Two gunmen in military uniforms shot and killed as many as nine people and wounded as many as 20 at Fort Hood in Texas on Thursday, officials said.

faxman75

11-05-2009, 02:03 PM

hahaha where do you work and why do you work with such weirdos? i mean i work with SOME weirdos but for the most part i just work with people who are really high maintenance fashionistas.

I work in an office building in down town Phoenix. It's a legal office. These people work in my department.

faxman75

11-05-2009, 02:04 PM

I miss Jesus. He was the best co-worker ever.

Fucker could build a hell of a table too.

Young blood

11-05-2009, 02:05 PM

Not that Jesus. Foi's Jesus.

canexplain

11-05-2009, 02:07 PM

Ok so this might be a non sequitur but: What is the difference between Faxy posting whatever about a fellow worker or Randy posting to a newbie saying the off the wall things he might say. A new person comes on, we don’t know them, and in turn they get roasted as badly as you can be. Using some of the reasoning people here are stating, the newbie could sue us or the board if that was the case. Just wondering ….. cr****

TommyboyUNM

11-05-2009, 02:11 PM

Ok so this might be a non sequitur but: What is the difference between Faxy posting whatever about a fellow worker or Randy posting to a newbie saying the off the wall things he might say. A new person comes on, we don’t know them, and in turn they get roasted as badly as you can be. Using some of the reasoning people here are stating, the newbie could sue us or the board if that was the case. Just wondering ….. cr****

Are you asking if the newbie could sue us or the board for being mean to him/her? If someone called the newbie "gay" or something like that then that person still wouldn't have a case because of the context in which that statement was made.

I have trouble deciphering you anyway, so did that answer your question??

miscorrections

11-05-2009, 02:12 PM

No, because when some new person gets skewered it's without knowledge of their personal or professional life (unless they voluntarily post something about that, in which case it's fair game).

BROKENDOLL

11-05-2009, 02:13 PM

How can I participate in this thread with no worries? Hmmm...
http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w18/1BROKENDOLL/thespringsclub-1.jpg
God, I actually feel better about being unemployed now...

BROKENDOLL

11-05-2009, 02:21 PM

Well, I see my timing couldn't be any better stepping into this thread.

Man, am I glad I just left it at the picture! I had 3 paragraphs of libel all ready to go!

Here is a picture that represents my boss. He likes to make comments about women and how they go to work on a whim just to have something to pass the time, he does not believe in gay marriage and he was really happy to learn that I actually knew how to make a pot of coffee the other day. I had to inform him that I only made the pot of coffee because I drank the last cup, as everyone should.

canexplain

11-05-2009, 02:37 PM

I don’t think they could sue but that is not what I was saying. If a newbie girl comes on the board and “we” say “Hey it’s a girl and everyone knows all women are whores therefore we already know you are a whore and suck dicks so come on down to my place and do it….” that is all right but you can’t say a woman at work looks like a chicken on the board. Hummm ….. cr****

locachica73

11-05-2009, 02:38 PM

wow

faxman75

11-05-2009, 02:46 PM

I don’t think they could sue but that is not what I was saying. If a newbie girl comes on the board and “we” say “Hey it’s a girl and everyone knows all women are whores therefore we already know you are a whore and suck dicks so come on down to my place and do it….” that is all right but you can’t say a woman at work looks like a chicken on the board. Hummm ….. cr****

I'm fairly certain you can say anything you want Ron, it's the repercussions that vary.

Have we ever greeted a random newbie by calling her a whore for no apparent reason or is this insight as to something that might umm slip out and if/when it does you want to know what the repercussions will be?

Monklish

11-05-2009, 02:54 PM

I certainly have.

BROKENDOLL

11-05-2009, 02:54 PM

I'm fairly certain you can say anything you want Ron, it's the repercussions that vary.
I know what my reprecussion would be...

http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w18/1BROKENDOLL/thebirdbybevie.jpg

crazzz2007

11-05-2009, 04:16 PM

There is nothing wrong with the picture (if posted without a description).

And there is nothing wrong with the description (if posted without a picture).

But there is something wrong with posting both the picture and the description.

Without a picture, no one can tell who you are talking about (unless you identify the person in your description by name, address, etc.).

And without a description, all you have is a picture (so you are good unless there is something wrong with the picture....such as nudity, etc.).

But by putting the 2 together, you are opening up yourself to a potential claim for defamation or some violation of privacy laws.

crazzz2007

11-05-2009, 04:38 PM

So, after doing some thinking, I don't think this woman would win a libel case. He stated his opinions about her, but didn't try to frame those opinions into something that was a concrete lie.

Whether she would actually win the case is almost beside the point. Getting sued (even if you win) sucks.

faxman75

11-05-2009, 04:57 PM

Here are a ton of internet message board related libel cases that all seem to have collected damages. It also seems if you take my messages and post them elsewhere you are also in the wrong.

But by putting the 2 together, you are opening up yourself to a potential claim for defamation or some violation of privacy laws.

In a litigious society there is potential for a zillion lawsuits. That doesn't make what I did illegal.

Where are you getting the idea that the two together is what opens it up to a "potential claim". State laws or federal laws? Privacy laws or libel laws? Do those laws include cell phone cameras?

You are making a general statement with little substantiation.

ETA: In 2004 the Voyeurism Prevention Act

The Video Voyeurism Prevention Act prohibits the photographing or videotaping of a naked person without his or her permission in a gym, tanning salon, dressing room or anywhere else where one expects a "reasonable expectation of privacy." Violators can expect fines of up to $100,000 and/or up to a year in prison.

This doesn't necessarily make it illegal for someone to snap your photo without your permission though. For instance, if you're just walking down the street and someone takes a picture, they're well within their rights no matter how violated you might feel. But if someone takes a picture of you without your permission while you're getting ready to shower at the gym, it's against the law. This law isn't limited to camera phones but also includes camcorders, cameras, and digital cameras.

http://www.legalzoom.com/legal-articles/camera-phones-privacy.html

crazzz2007

11-05-2009, 05:17 PM

In a litigious society there is potential for a zillion lawsuits. That doesn't make what I did illegal.

Where are you getting the idea that the two together is what opens it up to a "potential claim". State laws or federal laws? Privacy laws or libel laws? Do those laws include cell phone cameras?

You are making a general statement with little substantiation.

ETA: In 2004 the Voyeurism Prevention Act

http://www.legalzoom.com/legal-articles/camera-phones-privacy.html

You really should think before you post. You are one of the most airheaded people on this board.

I never called what you did illegal. I said you are opening yourself up to a "potential claim." Do you know what potential means? Do you know what a "claim" is? Anyone can make a claim against you. That doesn't mean they will be successful.

I also said, "Whether she would actually win the case is almost beside the point. Getting sued (even if you win) sucks."

God damnit....please stop the stupidity!!!!

I wasn't giving you legal advice. I don't do that over the internet. I was giving you practical advice.

faxman75

11-05-2009, 05:22 PM

You obviously can't fucking read worth a shit either as I specifically quoted your "potential claim" bit. I addressed the word potential as well.

The stupidity clearly needs to end with you as you just proved your post was useless by pointing out it meant nothing and that anyone can file a claim against anyone at any time which was my point.

Look how angry you got in your defense all the while choosing to ignore the point at hand. You came into this thread babbling about "potential claims".

I never quoted you or discussed you using the word illegal, the point is who gives a shit about a potential fucking claim? Not me.

So, I may be a stupid airhead but that doesn't change how pointless your post was or the fact that you didn't dispute a thing Tommy said. :) Grrr baby grrrr..

faxman75

11-05-2009, 05:31 PM

But there is something wrong with posting both the picture and the description.

But by putting the 2 together, you are opening up yourself to a potential claim for defamation or some violation of privacy laws.

Rather than resort to this name calling why don't you just show us some evidence to prove this point or clarify what you meant. "something wrong" to me sure comes off as illegal but feel free to explain further.

crazzz2007

11-05-2009, 06:03 PM

i simply meant that putting the 2 together creates a greater possibility of being sued.

captncrzy

11-06-2009, 08:20 AM

Legalities aside Mark...are you posting from work? And-haven't you been written up for spending too much time on the internet? You need to remember that you live in a right-to-work state; they can terminate you at will. It's pretty stupid if you're posting about the idiots you work with FROM WORK knowing full well that you've been in trouble for being on the internet before.

Unemployment doesn't pay much in Arizona.

fatbastard

11-06-2009, 08:23 AM

Especially if it's the person who does the actual firing.

canexplain

11-06-2009, 08:25 AM

I certainly have.

ya, I think Faxy must have been asleep this morn. More then once a newbie has come here only to run with their tail between their ?? cr****

justinaqui

11-06-2009, 08:31 AM

This thread went from a borderline funny idea to talking about law cases? Holy shit, worst thread of the decade.

humanoid

11-06-2009, 09:08 AM

I find it funny that I'm having trouble getting a job right now, but the people that actually have jobs seem to do very little work while there

canexplain

11-06-2009, 09:57 AM

I find it funny that I'm having trouble getting a job right now, but the people that actually have jobs seem to do very little work while there

Yea I have been to work for 5 hours now and have done nothing but surf. I am not complaining, but sometimes life is not fair. I know people who would work hard at my job if they had it. I would say I have Retirement syndrome but it's been like this at my work for 25 years. Hope you get a job ..... cr****

Young blood

11-06-2009, 10:04 AM

Going postal seems to be the norm this week.

canexplain

11-06-2009, 10:09 AM

Going postal seems to be the norm this week.

We had 2 "postal" people at my work thru the years. There was only one shot in a window, but that shit does happen. Spooky, we have the same post numbers YB lol ..... cr****

paganman7

11-06-2009, 10:17 AM

I find it funny that I'm having trouble getting a job right now, but the people that actually have jobs seem to do very little work while there

True dat, homie. I've applied for about 50 jobs so far, and have only spoken to 3 employers (offers pending).

I'd just about suck someone's dick to get a job.

locachica73

11-06-2009, 10:29 AM

I'd just about suck someone's dick to get a job.

For some people that is a job...

I work for an underground utility company in the office and we are starting to get quite a bit more work and are now placing ads to do hiring. I have also heard from people out looking that they are getting more interviews and seeing more postings. Things might be finally leveling out and/or improving.

Good luck.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah

11-09-2009, 08:25 PM

I don’t think they could sue but that is not what I was saying. If a newbie girl comes on the board and “we” say “Hey it’s a girl and everyone knows all women are whores therefore we already know you are a whore and suck dicks so come on down to my place and do it….” that is all right but you can’t say a woman at work looks like a chicken on the board. Hummm ….. cr****

I have no idea what this means.

Alternate

11-09-2009, 11:23 PM

i work in construction. i also do ymca stage shows as the police on the weekends at gay bars.